Author Topic: One major feature that Aurora lack in your opinion.  (Read 2673 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline GodEmperor (OP)

  • Commander
  • *********
  • Posts: 312
  • Thanked: 30 times
One major feature that Aurora lack in your opinion.
« on: March 24, 2016, 03:11:29 PM »
Title says it all.

What ONE MAJOR feature Aurora lacks in your opinion ? And i mean MAJOR, not some small thing like "beams should have little longer range" or "nerf point defence".

For me its the sound and im talking mainly about unit quotes, voiced announcements about detected hostile ships, lost vessels, finished research etc.
I just finished some exploratory play in the new Master of Orion reboot and before that i played Sword of the Stars 2/Imperium Galactica Open and its simply amazing how much life it pours into the game to hear your captains announcing their attack, lost ships or research advisors all excited because you just discovered antimatter warheads.

This is not a suggestion thread - more like "wishful thinking" kind one ;)
."I am Colonel-Commissar Ibram Gaunt. I am known as a fair man, unless I am pushed.
You have just pushed me."
 

Offline jem

  • Warrant Officer, Class 2
  • ****
  • j
  • Posts: 50
  • Thanked: 4 times
Re: One major feature that Aurora lack in your opinion.
« Reply #1 on: March 24, 2016, 04:56:27 PM »
The ability to give orders in the gui.
 

Offline TMaekler

  • Vice Admiral
  • **********
  • Posts: 1112
  • Thanked: 298 times
Re: One major feature that Aurora lack in your opinion.
« Reply #2 on: March 24, 2016, 06:00:14 PM »
Maybe not a major feature, but a more complex automation system - especially when progressing the game into several star systems - might be nice to keep things flowing.

Continent management on planets with multiple fractions... .  8)
 

Iranon

  • Guest
Re: One major feature that Aurora lack in your opinion.
« Reply #3 on: March 24, 2016, 06:53:21 PM »
Scriptable orders.
 

Offline TMaekler

  • Vice Admiral
  • **********
  • Posts: 1112
  • Thanked: 298 times
Re: One major feature that Aurora lack in your opinion.
« Reply #4 on: March 25, 2016, 03:54:17 AM »
Exporting and Reimporting Star Systems from one game to the other.
 

Offline MarcAFK

  • Vice Admiral
  • **********
  • Posts: 2005
  • Thanked: 134 times
  • ...it's so simple an idiot could have devised it..
Re: One major feature that Aurora lack in your opinion.
« Reply #5 on: March 25, 2016, 04:38:48 AM »
Multiplayer.
" Why is this godforsaken hellhole worth dying for? "
". . .  We know nothing about them, their language, their history or what they look like.  But we can assume this.  They stand for everything we don't stand for.  Also they told me you guys look like dorks. "
"Stop exploding, you cowards.  "
 

Offline xeryon

  • Captain
  • **********
  • Posts: 581
Re: One major feature that Aurora lack in your opinion.
« Reply #6 on: March 25, 2016, 07:35:47 AM »
Having ground combat be more than just numbers and a roll of dice.  It would be player controlled battles with variables based on the terrain of the planet and it's environment and suitability cost would have an impact on your troops performance.
 

Offline firsal

  • Sub-Lieutenant
  • ******
  • f
  • Posts: 107
  • Thanked: 55 times
Re: One major feature that Aurora lack in your opinion.
« Reply #7 on: March 25, 2016, 08:32:18 AM »
More resources other than minerals, like food, water and energy. Basically these would add more flavour to the game.
 

Offline Sheb

  • Commodore
  • **********
  • Posts: 789
  • Thanked: 30 times
Re: One major feature that Aurora lack in your opinion.
« Reply #8 on: March 25, 2016, 09:27:13 AM »
More detailed terraforming. Instead of just pumping gas in or out of a planet, have to mine the gas to bring it in, bring water by sending asteroids slam into that planet, etc etc.
 

Offline Vandermeer

  • Rear Admiral
  • **********
  • Posts: 961
  • Thanked: 128 times
Re: One major feature that Aurora lack in your opinion.
« Reply #9 on: March 25, 2016, 09:31:56 AM »
More+and descriptive anomalies. Instead of just a science bonus, - some line somewhere that attempts to explain why (neutrino storms, easily accessible hot-ice,...). Other than that some more real curiosities like the famous green cheese moons that are already in :), and something really optical perhaps. The one planet that somehow survived besides a black hole, or a traveling planet that just recently got caught up by a star, causing comet-like flight paths, or (recently seen in new Stellaris alpha gameplay) a flying teapot with drawn orbit around the star. Maybe somewhere out there is an actual bug planet that spawns powerful ground units all the time, but also has some hidden value that might make invading it look worthwhile, or a lonesome massive trader ship that after visiting a planet bestows massive wealth or even improves the trade goods, or an ancient artificial planet you can stumble upon, maybe ringworld even... .
You get it. Color in anomalies. Super rare each, so many games may go without finding any of them, but a chance for the amazing to happen would be... amazing..
playing Aurora as swarm fleet: Zen Nomadic Hive Fantasy
 

Offline GodEmperor (OP)

  • Commander
  • *********
  • Posts: 312
  • Thanked: 30 times
Re: One major feature that Aurora lack in your opinion.
« Reply #10 on: March 25, 2016, 03:54:48 PM »
More+and descriptive anomalies. Instead of just a science bonus, - some line somewhere that attempts to explain why (neutrino storms, easily accessible hot-ice,...). Other than that some more real curiosities like the famous green cheese moons that are already in :), and something really optical perhaps. The one planet that somehow survived besides a black hole, or a traveling planet that just recently got caught up by a star, causing comet-like flight paths, or (recently seen in new Stellaris alpha gameplay) a flying teapot with drawn orbit around the star. Maybe somewhere out there is an actual bug planet that spawns powerful ground units all the time, but also has some hidden value that might make invading it look worthwhile, or a lonesome massive trader ship that after visiting a planet bestows massive wealth or even improves the trade goods, or an ancient artificial planet you can stumble upon, maybe ringworld even... .
You get it. Color in anomalies. Super rare each, so many games may go without finding any of them, but a chance for the amazing to happen would be... amazing..

Oh yeah, i like that. Something like in Distant Worlds where you had special discoveries on some planets, derelict but working ships, space anomalies etc.
."I am Colonel-Commissar Ibram Gaunt. I am known as a fair man, unless I am pushed.
You have just pushed me."
 

Offline 83athom

  • Big Ship Commander
  • Vice Admiral
  • **********
  • Posts: 1261
  • Thanked: 86 times
Re: One major feature that Aurora lack in your opinion.
« Reply #11 on: March 28, 2016, 08:47:37 AM »
Having ground combat be more than just numbers and a roll of dice.  It would be player controlled battles with variables based on the terrain of the planet and it's environment and suitability cost would have an impact on your troops performance.
I agree. And my suggestion is a hex based system with the hexes based on planet size. Yes, I know how cliche hex based ground combat is, but think of the possibilities in aurora. Some units would be faster (like mobile infantry, marines, combat engineers), while the bigger heavy units would be slower (like heavy assault, and low tech units), and maybe an in between speed (HQs, construction, replacement, etc). Titans the slowest of all but they have a huge range. Maybe even making sectors on the planet based on manufacturing/civilian/military structures amount (all randomly assigned each planet on generation/making colony, and then the sectors grow as you add) as well as strategic locations (government buildings, power plants, etc). PDCs would also have a static location on the surface (either placed automatically or player placed on building/ordering) and PDC weapons could give support to nearby units that are engaged in combat. I'm 50/50 on weather or not you should be able to stack PDCs on the same hex or have a hard/soft cap based on the hex "type"(civilian, industrial, military, unused, etc) . Bombardment would add hazards to the battlefield, like zones that are uncrossable except by special units (and/or Titans) for a good while or damage any unspecialized unit that crosses. And when I say a hex system, I don't mean something small (like Stardrive size of a dozen zones across), I mean planets Earth sized should be around 100+ hexes in diameter (larger planets have a lot more, smaller planets with less). Asteroids would only be like 5-10 hexes and the "strategic" point would be any PDCs, industrial/mining sectors, and/or the entrance sector to any underground installations. On that note actually, asteroids with underground facilities could have a second hex layer to represent the underground just to keep them interesting (and combat engineers and marines would get a bonus because of similarities to ships/PDCs). It could also be made so you need sensor coverage of the planet with your own ships/satellites/installations to see enemy units. Units could also have their own sensor range for when there are no ships/installations that can see the enemy (with some units having longer range and some a lot shorter, with Titan having a really short range). PDCs would always be visible after you seen them once because they are static objects. These changes would also add a reason to add ranged support units like artillery battalions and such that would have similar mechanics as Titans, but a shorter range/damage but would be faster. But of course, the damage, speed, and range would be affected by research (mid-late game heavies as fast/faster as early game "light" units, mid-late game artillers longer range than first Titan, etc).

The units would be represented by those rectangle codes (difefrent units would have different codes, maybe the player could change them like how they can change flags). Titans by a robot shaped symbol. And PDCs by a bunker shape. Units/Titans/PDCs on the same hex would stack, and you would get a breakdown by clicking on the hex (like you can on the system view).

Of course, instead of the ground unit tab for all this, there would be a separate window. The current ground unit tabs would largely stay, but modified to not have the "initiate combat with population".

Another note is that this would be quite interesting with multi-nation games and I have no idea how that would be set up. Obviously there could be a border system where it shows the borders of the different nations' areas (the border itself could tell you the diplomatic status with them. Dashed white line for neutral/cold war, solid/dashed green for friendly, solid blue for ally, and solid red for enemy/hostile).

On the note of colors, hexes with active combat would be highlighted by an Orange color or have stripes going through.
« Last Edit: March 28, 2016, 09:28:45 AM by 83athom »
Give a man a fire and he's warm for a day, but set fire to him and he's warm for the rest of his life.
 

Offline TMaekler

  • Vice Admiral
  • **********
  • Posts: 1112
  • Thanked: 298 times
Re: One major feature that Aurora lack in your opinion.
« Reply #12 on: March 28, 2016, 09:13:14 AM »
Hex based systems are the prime of strategy games :-)


*********************
***** PROMOTION *****
*********************

http://www.asc-hq.de/

*********************
 

Offline alex_brunius

  • Vice Admiral
  • **********
  • Posts: 1240
  • Thanked: 153 times
Re: One major feature that Aurora lack in your opinion.
« Reply #13 on: March 29, 2016, 02:17:17 PM »
Supply & Demand  ( for trade, immigration, resources and all things civilian ).